Study talks up revenue potential for new D.C. stadium

Jun 4, 2012, 3:06 PM EDT

Somebody remind me, how many times did Lucy pull the football away from Charlie Brown before ol’ Chuck finally figured it out, finally decided he was being naïve about it all?

Oh, that’s right. He never did.

Well, call me Charlie Brown, but I still get a little excited when I see stadium news out of Washington, D.C., an MLS market that so desperately needs a dedicated facility – one that’s not a broken bolt or two away from being officially condemned.

Here’s the latest volley of facility optimism out of the nation’s capital.

A study has just been discovered that says a new 24,000-seat D.C. Untied stadium would cost at least $157 million, but might just generate more than $7 million a year in tax revenue.

Fans that have followed the most troubled hill of Don Garber Valley (facility-wise, that is) know all too well: studies and press conferences regarding facility development, even when they seem to hold so much promise, have reliably devolved into fool’s gold.

A study doesn’t move the effort to get out of dilapidated RFK Stadium very far, but it’s something. And in case this turns into something – and someday, hopefully, one of these will – you are now up to speed.

Skip to Comments (4)

« Newer U.S. midfielder Michael Bradley: gradually dropping his guard

Older » ESPN Classic is reliving past Euro greatness

More ProSoccerTalk

Back to Homepage

4 Comments (Feed for Comments)

bishopofblunder - Jun 4, 2012 at 3:17 PM

God bless the eternal optimists (not to mention the beasts and the children).

Log in to Reply
DJ MC - Jun 4, 2012 at 3:19 PM

This may have been discussed before–I’m relatively new to these parts of the NBCSports world–and it was briefly mentioned in that article, but DC United just agreed to a second study with the Maryland Stadium Authority about a new soccer-specific stadium south of the Camden Yards complex in Baltimore.

http://www.pressboxonline.com/blog.cfm?ID=4875

The club even agreed to reimburse the MSA for the cost of the study if they eventually relocated anywhere other than Baltimore.

My personal soccer fandom is in its infancy, but being from Baltimore I’m following this flirtation with the MLS with interest.

Log in to Reply
joeyt360 - Jun 4, 2012 at 4:12 PM

“Fans that have followed the most troubled hill of Don Garber Valley (facility-wise, that is) know all too well: studies and press conferences regarding facility development, even when they seem to hold so much promise, have reliably devolved into fool’s gold.”

–Worse than fool’s gold. Generally, it presages the backlash.

Log in to Reply
LasVegasMatt - Jun 4, 2012 at 5:23 PM

I support MLS whole heartily, but for my own selfish reasons I need this team (along with Columbus and Chivas USA) for my own selfish reasons. The more teams that fail, the more likely Vegas gets a team. I always hate hearing about teams not bringing in enough fans because I feel that’s a bad local representation of US soccer. Most people are followers, so the more people that want to go the easier it is to bring in new faces to show them how great the MLS truly is (not the joke Sportscenter makes it out to be). If DC doesn’t work as a viable MLS city, hopefully Baltimore (or Vegas) will be able to support them!!

Log in to Reply